4 ms·
> The concern is valid. But there’s a deeper worry, one that involves the enlargement not of our gullibility but of our cynicism. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has voic
by ToucanLoucan 1y ago
> The concern is valid. But there’s a deeper worry, one that involves the enlargement not of our gullibility but of our cynicism. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has voiced worries about the use of AI to influence elections, but he says the threat will go away once “everyone gets used to it.”
> Some experts believe the opposite is true: The risks will grow as we acclimate ourselves to the presence of deepfakes. Once we take the counterfeits for granted, we may begin doubting the veracity of all the information presented to us through media. We may, in the words of the mathematics professor and deepfake authority Noah Giansiracusa, start to “doubt reality itself.” We’ll go from a world where our bias was to take everything as evidence to one where our bias is to take nothing as evidence.
It is journalistic malpractice that these viewpoints are presented as though the former has anything to actually say. Of course Altman says it's no big deal, he's selling the fucking things. He is not an engineer, he is not a sociologist, he is not an expert at anything except some vague notion of businessness. Why is his opinion next to an expert's, even setting aside his flagrant and massive bias in the discussion at hand!?
"The owner of the orphan crushing machine says it'll be fine once we adjust to the sound of the orphans being crushed."
> “Every expert I spoke with,” reports an Atlantic writer, “said it’s a matter of when, not if, we reach a deepfake inflection point, after which forged videos and audio spreading false information will flood the internet.”
Depending where you go this is already true. Facebook is absolutely saturated in the shit. I have to constantly mute accounts and "show less like" on BlueSky posts because it's just AI generated allegedly attractive women (I personally prefer the ones that look... well, human, but that's just me). Every online art community either is trying to remove the AI garbage or has just given up and categorized it, asking users uploading it to please tag it so their other users who don't want to see it can mute it, and of course they don't because AI people are lazy.
Also I'd be remiss to not point out that this is, yet again, something I and many many others predicted back when this shit started getting going properly, and waddaya know.
That said, to be honest, I'm not that worried about the political angle. The politics of fakery, deep or otherwise, has always meant it's highly believable and consumable for the audience it's intended for because it's basically an amped-up version of political cartoons. Conservatives don't need their "Obama is destroying America!" images to be photorealistic to believe them, they just need them to stroke their confirmation bias. They're fine believing it even if it's flagrantly fake.
- HPsquared 1y agoIt's the same idea as "lies spread faster than truth". Lies are often crafted to be especially juicy and salacious. Gossip has always been a problem; GenAI just extends this problem to other media.
- EGreg 1y agoWhat is it that makes some people on HN pop up to always respond to any issue with AI with a version of "it was always this way, the problem always existed, AI does nothing fundamentally new". When it's clear that huge leaps in scale, coordination, and output quality accessible to anyone, are exactly what produces "new" use cases. Not to mention that swarms of agents are a fundamentally new thing, that doesn't require humans in the loop at all. Notice that this phenomenon didn't happen as much on HN for other technologies, e.g. when the iPhone came out, very few people said "well, this is nothing new, computers existed for a long time, this is just minituarizing it and unplugging it from the wall."
- supriyo-biswas 1y ago> when the iPhone came out, very few people said "well, this is nothing new, computers existed for a long time, this is just minituarizing it and unplugging it from the wall." This website is, of course, notorious for its Dropbox comment, so regrettably the viewpoint you speak of is rather common.
- captainbland 1y agoI think the other issue is that those lies can be pumped out at inhuman speeds, and specifically targeted at particular audiences automatically using existing online audience marketing tools. So you can end up in a situation where the lie not only spreads quickly, but different audiences are receiving specialised versions of that lie which makes it particularly compelling to them, generated by AI tools, and totally responsive to real world events and narratives at minimal cost (compared to hiring humans to do the same job) - and this might happen at a really fine grained level.
- drweevil 1y ago